[OpenID] Specs council ineffective?

[Nat Sakimura]

Hi Martin,

I and many members of the current board share the same view as you do.
Thus we have put forward four motions to cope with the problem.

Please see:
http://wiki.openid.net/Vote%3A-Spec-Process-Improvement

Unfortunately, it requries membeship vote because it will be a change to
the process, but I think we need to do it.

Your support would be much appreciated.

=nat

On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Martin Atkins <mart at degeneration.co.uk>wrote:

>
> From watching the progress of some specs, in particular the TX spec,
> through the specs council, it seems that the specs council is currently not
> able to operate effectively.
>
> While I agree with the idea of the specs council I think it could do with
> being streamlined.
>
> I think the most useful thing to do as a first step would be to refresh the
> specs council membership with people that are currently active in the
> community. There are several members who are no longer actively involved in
> the community or in specification development and who seem to delay
> proceedings.
>
> I'm not sure what the best process would be for selecting new members;
> since part of the specs council's role is to be somewhat separate from OIDF,
> putting it to an OIDF membership vote seems a little weird. I'd love to hear
> other suggestions.
>
> _______________________________________________
> general mailing list
> general at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
>



-- 
Nat Sakimura (=nat)
http://www.sakimura.org/en/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-general/attachments/20090120/91e1de5a/attachment-0001.htm>